Evelyn Street Redevelopment RFP Questions and Answers

January 13th, 2017

Evelyn Street Corridor Redevelopment Project RFP – Answers to Vendor Questions

January 12, 2017

 

  1. Is topographic survey and boundary survey requested on the T.D. Bank parcel?

A:  Yes.

  1. Has permission been granted by T.D. Bank to work on their property?

A:  At this time specific site access agreements are being negotiated with applicable property owners within the redevelopment area.

  1. Are soil borings desired on the TD Bank and Amtrak parcels?

A:  Potentially, dependent on vendors engineering judgement and initial environmental findings.

  1. Budget – How much would the selected team have for this range of tasks?

A:  The anticipated budget for this project is $30,000 to $35,000.

  1. Is there a more detailed conceptual plan available other than the one included in the RFP?

A:  No.

  1. Who developed the conceptual plan?

A:  Conceptual design plan was developed by Enman Kesselring Consulting Engineers.

  1. What are the project limits/boundaries? (Presumably some element of the conceptual plan are on private land and outside the scope of this study.)

A:  Project boundaries are generally the lands abutting Evelyn Street and associated with the Rutland Shopping Plaza and City owned lands associated with the Amtrak station.

  1. What is the budget for the study?

A:  The anticipated budget for this project is $30,000 to $35,000.

  1. Has a Phase I environmental assessment been completed and is this study available?

A:  A Phase I environmental assessment has not been completed to our knowledge.

  1. Have any traffic studies been done in the area recently to provide a baseline for requested traffic investigations?

A:  Yes.  A traffic study of the Evelyn St. corridor was completed in 2011.

 

 

 

  1. The RFP has the following language:

“The existing conditions site plan shall depict all significant physical features and shall include existing topography and a boundary survey of all properties within the project area.”

A literal interpretation of this would be a complete legal boundary survey (field monumention (pins), land transaction quality plats, title work, etc.) of every individual property involved in the project area (all buildings along Evelyn Street, the bank drive thru, the former CVPS building, the plaza, the City owned park, etc). Is this the intent? Or is to just show the boundaries as best can be determined from existing survey and City plat records on file so that future specific land transfers can be done at a later date with fillable survey plats done at that time?

A:  A complete legal boundary survey may not be necessary.  The successful vendor would need to perform the type and amount of work necessary to understand any and all land rights and ownership issues within the redevelopment area which could affect the potential redevelopment project and preliminary site plan design.

  1.   To assist us in determining depth of analysis for our proposals, can you tell us if the funding for this project is limited to the VCDP grant award? Can you share the associated project budget?

A:  The anticipated budget for this project is $30,000 to $35,000.

  1.   The budget appears to be stretched thin given the scope of items identified in the RFP. Can the RRA identify priority scope items?

A:  The intent of the RFP Scope of Work is to depict the expected end product from the completed planning study.

  1.   Can you provide a little information with regard to what the RRA plans to do with the study information provided through this project? This would help us prioritize for our proposal.

A:  The intent of the planning study is to determine if the proposed redevelopment project is financially viable for the public and private parties involved and can proceed to project implementation.

  1.   Is there brownfields money available to apply to subsurface investigation work?

A:  There may be potential brownfields program funds available through the Rutland Regional Planning Commission’s Brownfields Reuse Program but the project area has not been enrolled in the program to date.

  1. Will environmental review of the existing TD Bank building be required to develop demolition costs?

A:  The TD Bank drive-through building will undergo a historical architectural review simultaneously, but outside the scope of this planning study.  Developing specific demolition costs for this structure will not be within the planning study scope of work but a rough estimate of probable costs would be required.

  1.   Is there an established timeline for the project?

A:  A formal timeline will be negotiated with the successful vendor prior to contract award.  Anticipated timeframe to complete the planning study would be 4-6 months from date of award.

 

  1. Does the proposal need to be submitted in two envelopes? One for the technical proposal and a separate one for the cost proposal?

A:  Proposal should be submitted in one envelope.

  1. Are you seeking the technical and cost proposals in one package or separately?

A:  Proposal should be submitted in one envelope.

  1. Is there a performance schedule associated with the grant funding?

A:  A mid-term project report will be required.

  1. Is there a proposed hotel / conference center building plan (or plans for other redevelopments) that would be incorporated into the conceptual plans and feasibility review? A: No. There is a conceptual estimated building footprint only. If so, are plans available? Is below-grade parking anticipated? A: No. Would any coordination with developers be anticipated as part of this feasibility project? A: Yes. If there are no concrete development proposals at this time, what guidance would be provided in terms of assumptions regarding access, etc.?  A:  Selected vendor would be expected to work with prospective developer on defining proposals and preliminary design plan.
  2. Will the CAD drawings prepared for the Conceptual Site Plan included in the RFP be available to the selected consultant team?

A:  The City would share the PDF version of the conceptual plan but does not own the CAD drawings.

  1. What level of existing conditions / survey is currently available for this area?

A:  As a previously developed site it is suspected that there are existing maps available to which the selected vendor would have access.

  1. Is any public process anticipated?

A:  No formal public engagement process is included in the scope of work but suggestions could be included in a response.

  1. Is identification of required project permits requested?

A:  Yes.

  1. Scope Item A. indicates the need for a topographic and boundary survey. It is assumed that these documents will be prepared to the level of detail/accuracy such that they may ultimately be used for final design/construction drawings. The RFP has the following language: “The existing conditions site plan shall depict all significant physical features and shall include existing topography and a boundary survey of all properties within the project area. ” (emphasis added) A literal interpretation of this would be a complete legal boundary survey (field monumentation (pins), land transaction quality plats, title work, etc.) of every individual property involved in the project area (all buildings along Evelyn Street, the bank drive thru, the former CVPS building, the plaza, the City owned park, etc). Is this the intent? Or is to just show the boundaries as best can be determined from existing survey and City plat records on file so that future specific land transfers can be done at a later date with fillable survey plats done at that time? A boundary survey of the NET property already exists. Individual property surveys of each parcel “within the project area” (however that is defined) will be expensive at this time and may not be what you are looking for.

A:  A complete legal boundary survey may not be necessary.  The successful vendor would need to perform the type and amount of work necessary to understand any and all land rights and ownership issues within the redevelopment area which could affect the potential redevelopment project and preliminary site plan design.

 

  1. Scope Item B.
    1. Does the RRA expect the Consultant to build directly upon the conceptual plan provided in the RFP or does that plan simply convey the generalized intentions of the RRA with regards to expected outcomes of redevelopment?  A:  The later.
    2. The Conceptual Site Plan implies that the Project Area is defined by the western side of Freight Street / North side of Walmart and its parking lot / Northeast side of Evelyn Street.  Please confirm.  A:  Project boundaries are generally the lands abutting Evelyn Street and associated with the Rutland Shopping Plaza and City owned lands associated with the Amtrak station.
    3. The project does not involve the redesign of the Strongs Ave/Merchants Row or Center Street.  A:  No, unless specifically related to egress into the project redevelopment area.
    4. As a “vibrant,” “pedestrian only public space” does the City/developer envision an area on-par with Burlington’s Church Street for amenities?  Hardscape, benches, fountains, plantings, wayfinding, etc? This information will guide us in determining the level of effort to include for landscape design and cost estimating.  A:  Yes, an environment similar to the Church St. Marketplace is envisioned.  Level of detail necessary for the preliminary site plan design will be dependent on vendors engineering judgement.
    5. The Concept Plan indicates redevelopment of the property on the northeast side of Evelyn Street and covered walkways to Merchants Row.  Are either of these to be considered with this preliminary evaluation?  A:  No.
  1. Scope Item C. Is the Environmental Assessment limited to the hotel footprint or must sampling be completed across the entire site?  A:  Potentially more expansive than the hotel footprint dependent on vendors engineering judgement and initial environmental findings.  Has a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment been completed for the property?  A:  A Phase I environmental assessment has not been completed to our knowledge.  Does the City/RRA have agreements for conducting borings/testing on private property?  A:  At this time specific site access agreements are being negotiated with applicable property owners within the redevelopment area.
  1. Scope Item D.
    1. Has a traffic study been completed for Downtown Rutland?  A:  A traffic study of the Evelyn St. corridor was completed in 2011.  Has a parking study for downtown been completed?  A:  No.
    2. Are traffic counts anticipated as part of this study?  A:  Yes.
    3. What parcels are currently controlled by the City and/or available for consideration for an evaluation of parking adequacy?  A:  Selected vendor will need to determine as part of scope of work.
    4. Please indicate the limit of parking analysis required.  Is existing parking “allocated” to other uses and therefore not available for the proposed use?   A:  Selected vendor will need to determine as part of scope of work.
    5. Will the RRA provide the Consultant with the conceptual hotel footprint to be used or should that be derived as a result of the process?  A:  There is a conceptual estimated building footprint only.  Selected vendor would be expected to work with prospective developer on defining proposals and preliminary design plan.
  2. Funding
    1. Is this phase of the project solely funded by the VCDP planning grant or are other sources available to supplement. Is there a budget limit for this study? Knowing this will help identify any issues of the requested services exceeding available funds, and perhaps allow suggestions of priorities within available funding.  A:  The anticipated budget for this project is $30,000 to $35,000.
    2. Does the City anticipate the use of VTrans or Federal Highway funds for future phases of work?  If yes, this may impact the format and content of deliverables.  A:  No.
  3. What level of public input or review process is required by the grant?  What is needed to assure the planning study has value to the community going forward?  A:  No formal public engagement process is included in the scope of work but suggestions could be included in a response.
  1. The “Open Perils” insurance coverage is not one typically carried by a consulting engineer. Can you comment on whether this coverage only applies to a contractor doing work on the property or what the city is looking for?

A:  The City has developed minimum insurance coverage limits for construction related projects which may or may not be applicable to all elements of the Planning Study scope of work.  Selected vendor would have the ability to provide reasons each element should not apply and seek waiver of that specific element prior to a contract award.